Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1




|Views: 5 |Likes:
Published by nyc

More info:

Published by: nyc on Sep 28, 2007
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





   L   I   V   I   N   G    C   I   T   I   E   S  :   T   H   E   N   A   T   I   O   N   A   L   C   O   M   M   U   N   I   T   Y   D   E   V   E   L   O   P   M   E   N   T   I   N   I   T   I   A   T   I   V   E   •
   N   E   W    Y   O   R   K   I   N   F   O   C   U   S  :
   A    P   R   O   F   I   L   E   F   R   O   M    C   E   N   S   U   S   2   0   0   0
For instance, a city may have lost population overall during the 1990sbut gained households, hinting that the city may have lost families withchildren even as it attracted singles. In this fashion, the household compo-sition of a city can provide leaders critical intelligence as to the kindsof housing and services they need to provide. Such data may also proveinvaluable in helping cities frame strategies to lure wider mixes of familiesthrough proactive housing and amenities strategies.Along the way, household data from Census 2000 tell a fascinating story.Census 2000 called into question popular notions of who constitutes the“typical” U.S. household.One of the more widely announced findings was that the traditional“nuclear” family—married parents with children under 18—comprisedless than a quarter of all households in the U.S. (23.5 percent) in 2000.While the nuclear family has been on the decline for several decades, itwas notable that in 2000, people living alone represented a larger shareof households (26 percent) than “married with children” families. Thechanging makeup of U.S. households reflects a confluence of trends,including the aging of Baby Boomers into their “empty-nest” years, andan increase in the typical age of first marriage (now 27 for men, 25 forwomen). U.S. households remain highly mobile, though, with almost half changing residences between 1995 and 2000.In both cities and suburbs, “nonfamilies”—people living alone or withnon-relatives—were the dominant household type in 2000. This aggregatestatistic, however, belies interesting trends in large metro areas thatcounter assumptions about who lives in cities and suburbs. In citiesthroughout the Southwest and West, “married with children” familieswere on the upswing in the 1990s. In contrast, suburbs in the slower-growing Northeast and Midwest experienced the bulk of their householdgrowth in nonfamilies and single-parent families. Still, across all metroareas, all types of households were more likely to be located in suburbsthan in cities.In this section we compare the types of households that live in New Yorkto those living in other large cities, and look at changes in households inthe city and its suburbs over the 1990s. We also probe whether New York’shouseholds are more or less mobile than those in other cities.
Population change is a good first indicator of city health. But data on the types of households that are contributing to change can provide far more nuanced clues aboutwhether a city is attractive to all kinds of people—or just some kinds.
   B   R   O   O   K   I   N   G   S   I   N   S   T   I   T   U   T   I   O   N    C   E   N   T   E   R   O   N    U   R   B   A   N    A   N   D   M   E   T   R   O   P   O   L   I   T   A   N    P   O   L   I   C   Y
   N   E   W    Y   O   R   K   I   N   F   O   C   U   S  :
   A    P   R   O   F   I   L   E   F   R   O   M    C   E   N   S   U   S   2   0   0   0
RankLiving Cities19902000
1Newark, NJ2.912.852Los Angeles, CA2.802.833Phoenix, AZ2.622.794San Antonio, TX2.802.775Detroit, MI2.712.776Chicago, IL2.672.677Miami, FL2.702.618Oakland, CA2.522.60
9New York, NY2.542.59
10Dallas, TX2.462.5811Philadelphia, PA2.562.4812Cleveland, OH2.482.4413Baltimore, MD2.592.4314Indianapolis, IN2.462.3915Kansas City, MO2.402.3516Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN2.262.3317Boston, MA2.372.3118Atlanta, GA2.402.3019Columbus, OH2.382.3020Portland, OR2.272.2921Denver, CO2.172.2622Washington, DC2.262.1623Seattle, WA2.092.08
All Living Cities2.502.49Nation2.632.59Peer CitiesRank2000
Miami, FL322.61San Diego, CA332.61Yonkers, NY342.61Oakland, CA352.60Aurora, CO362.60
New York, NY372.59
Dallas, TX382.58Sacramento, CA392.57Honolulu, HI402.57Grand Rapids, MI412.57Augusta-Richmond County, GA422.55
100-City Average2.56
Households in New York are roughly the same size on average as those across the 100 largest cities
 Average household size, 1990–2000: Living Cities and 100 largest cities
   L   I   V   I   N   G    C   I   T   I   E   S  :   T   H   E   N   A   T   I   O   N   A   L   C   O   M   M   U   N   I   T   Y   D   E   V   E   L   O   P   M   E   N   T   I   N   I   T   I   A   T   I   V   E   •
   N   E   W    Y   O   R   K   I   N   F   O   C   U   S  :
   A    P   R   O   F   I   L   E   F   R   O   M    C   E   N   S   U   S   2   0   0   0
Married Couple Married Couple Other Family Other Family IndividualRankLiving Citieswith Childrenwithout Childrenwith Childrenwithout ChildrenLiving AloneNonfamily
1 Phoenix, AZ 24.3% 22.6% 11.4% 7.6% 25.4% 8.6%2 San Antonio, TX 24.1% 24.0% 11.8% 9.4% 25.1% 5.7%3 Los Angeles, CA 22.6% 19.3% 10.9% 9.8% 28.5% 8.9%4 Dallas, TX 19.4% 19.4% 10.9% 9.4% 32.9% 8.0%5 Indianapolis, IN 18.0% 22.6% 11.9% 7.8% 32.0% 7.8%
6New York, NY17.6%19.6%12.1%12.0%31.9%6.8%
7 Chicago, IL 16.9% 18.2% 12.0% 12.5% 32.6% 7.9%8 Columbus, OH 16.5% 19.5% 11.5% 7.3% 34.1% 11.0%9 Oakland, CA 16.5% 17.6% 12.1% 11.1% 32.5% 10.3%10 Kansas City, MO 16.2% 21.8% 11.9% 8.4% 34.1% 7.6%11 Portland, OR 16.2% 21.9% 8.3% 6.5% 34.6% 12.5%12 Newark, NJ 15.1% 15.9% 20.1% 16.7% 26.6% 5.5%13 Denver, CO 15.0% 19.7% 8.2% 6.9% 39.3% 10.8%14 Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 14.9% 17.0% 10.4% 6.9% 38.5% 12.3%15 Miami, FL 14.7% 21.9% 11.6% 13.9% 30.4% 7.5%16 Philadelphia, PA 13.5% 18.5% 14.1% 13.6% 33.8% 6.5%17 Seattle, WA 12.5% 20.2% 5.4% 5.7% 40.8% 15.3%18 Detroit, MI 12.5% 14.1% 21.4% 16.9% 29.7% 5.4%19 Cleveland, OH 12.2% 16.3% 17.8% 12.5% 35.2% 6.0%20 Boston, MA 11.8% 15.7% 10.9% 9.7% 37.1% 14.8%21 Baltimore, MD 10.0% 16.7% 15.5% 14.9% 34.9% 8.0%22 Atlanta, GA 9.2% 15.3% 13.2% 11.7% 38.5% 12.1%23 Washington, DC 8.4% 14.5% 11.4% 11.7% 43.8% 10.2%
All Living Cities17.2%19.2%12.1%10.9%32.4%8.3%Nation24.3%28.2%9.1%6.9%25.8%5.8%
* Children include sons and daughters of householders under 18 years of age. Other families include two or more related individuals who are not married and living together. Other nonfamilies include house-holders living with nonrelatives.
The mix of households in New York is very similar to that in the average Living City
Share of households by type*, 2000: Living Cities

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->